Skip to comments.Estonian president scolds Paul Krugman on Twitter
Posted on 06/06/2012 7:55:18 PM PDT by mandaladon
The President of Estonia slammed Nobel laureate and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on Twitter today over Krugman's short blog post pooh-poohing the Eastern European country's economic recovery.
Krugman wrote that defenders of Europe's austerity measures often point to Estonia's economic recovery to defend their policies. He included a chart that showed the country's rising GDP and added: "Better than no recovery at all, obviouslybut this is what passes for economic triumph?"'
Estonia's president Toomas Hendrik Ilves struck back on Twitter. "Let's write about something we know nothing about & be smug, overbearing & patronizing: after all, they're just wogs," Ilves wrote, using the derogatory British slang term for dark-skinned people from Africa or the East.
"Guess a Nobel in trade means you can pontificate on fiscal matters & declare my country a 'wasteland'. Must be a Princeton vs Columbia thing," he added, referencing the two men's alma maters. (It's unclear when and if Krugman actually called Estonia a wasteland, even though Ilves puts the word in quotes.)
So far, Krugman hasn't joined in the Twitter fight.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Observing Krugman’s body language when he was getting schooled by George Will last Sunday was telling: He knows he’s lying but has painted himself into a corner. Everything Krugman has believed to be true is being proven false by current events. He is a weasel of the first order and he knows it.
Pick any mountain hick/redneck at random, present them with any given problem and it’s likely they will come to a working/workable solution faster, cheaper and more sensical than Krugman and his ivory tower associates.
I’d certainly rather associate with one.
Krugman gives the distinct impression of a person tormented with mental illness. Since he is a public figure and influential (he is the economic guru of the Democratic party), it would be appropriate for him to list the medications he is taking so Americans can better understand his behavior.
I'm not seeing where Mr. Ilves "slammed" Krugman. I see a fairly bland comment, expressed in a manner slightly ironic. If that's a "slam," I guess the typical Obumbo campaign fundraiser speech is "thermonuclear war."
Yes, Krugman is an idiot
Estonia is having success because they, like many other former Communist countries, know big government does not work.
And, they are doing this while the EU and Euro crashes.
Estonians are kind, educated, hard working people. And, with their lower taxes and lower cost of living compared to Scandinavian countries....they get a lot of people visiting and spending money.
If Krugman had brains, he would be researching and finding out why Estonia is doing well...not making stupid comments
"Krugman wrote that defenders of Europe's austerity measures often point to Estonia's economic recovery to defend their policies."
This refers to the fact that when the bubble burst, Estonia wasted no time in slashing public salaries 20% - 30% back to where they were pre boom. They slashed their budget the same. This is the austerity Krugman now condemns.
Wretched little man.
God Bless and Keep you, Estonia.
After observing Krugman for the past year or two...I’d have to say that he’s no smarter than some high school economics teacher out of Mississippi. Whatever the NY Times is paying this guy....it’s wasted money. I’d even say this...I’d put this Dave Ramsey financial knowledge guy up against Krugman, and I think Dave could dance circles around Drugman.
Krugman was called pontificating, condescending and arrogant. I would call that a pretty serious slam.
Words can crush as well as a sledgehammer.
In Krugman’s defense, you know he WAS busy trying to arrange an alien invasion of the interplanetary sort at the same time he was writing about Estonia.
This guy approves:
Analysis and criticism of America’s most prominent public intellectual and champion of Keynesian economics. I am part of the Austrian School of Economics, and I critique Krugman’s writings from that perspective.
See my tagline. Humanist Progressives use "research" to search for facts that don't exist, and therefore become pathological liars to justify their warped beliefs.
Keynesians are a class apart. The original guru was the very definition of a sociopath: (See Keynes & The Keynesians.)
"In the Socialist Review [snip], the following political position was published for all members to note:
Menaced by foreign miltary forces, the work of social and economic regeneration is now endangered.The Russian revolution is the heritage of the world.It must not be defeated by foreign militarism. It must be permitted to develop unhampered. It must live, so that Russia may be truly free and, through its freedom, blaze the way for industrial democracy throughout the world.(1919)(10)
Walter Lippmann and Felix Frankfurter managed to attach themselves as special assistants to the Secretary of War in 1917. While there, Lippmann and Frankfurter became closely associated with the then Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt.(11) F.D.R. later rewarded this friendship by appointing Frankfurter to the Supreme Court and American Fabians capitalized on this connection by grabbing hundreds of jobs in key Government positions.
Of course, the very essence of the Fabian approach is deception.
If you plan any updates to your section "Chapter I--American Constitutional Overview", I humbly recommend that you add under your section "framers were very specific in their grants of power" a link to FEDERALIST No. 41 General View of the Powers Conferred by The Constitution by James Madison, and show Madison's clear articulation of the limits on "general welfare" and commerce regulation.
Madison in #41 was laying out the arguments for national defense and DIRECTLY connected the "commerce" and "general welfare" clauses to national defense, not what has been distorted today as "welfare"
"The power of levying and borrowing money, being the sinew of that which is to be exerted in the national defense, is properly thrown into the same class with it. This power, also, has been examined already with much attention, and has, I trust, been clearly shown to be necessary, both in the extent and form given to it by the Constitution.Madison's words and thoughts could not be more clear-cut if a person objectively reads #41 and makes the syntactic, linguistic connections of part 1 with part 2.
Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction.
Actually, in Chapter I, I was trying to be brief. But any careful reading of the Constitution, in context, will lead to Madison's articulated limits. The delegated powers, each relate to specific functions; and those functions are all consistent with an established relationship, between the Governments, State & Federal, wherein the General Powers, other than those covered by the specific functions delegated, are left to the States & local communities (subdivisions of the States). There is all sorts of intrinsic evidence of a logical pattern that makes it very clear that the general powers to deal with the problems of individual citizens and groups, were never intended to be Federal.
This view is also supported by the historic fact, discussed in America Grounded On Experience & Reason, that the founders' approach, differed by 180 degrees from that of the modern Socialists, Communists & those some mistakenly call "Liberals," which is theory, not experience, driven.
Of course, one of the ultimate examples of the fallacy of the Left, are the Keynesians like Krugman, who are endlessly trying to fit reality into their artificial models.